Where Things Stand: 66,000 People Couldn’t Get An Abortion In Their Home State In First Six Months Post-Roe
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
In the wake of Idaho’s passage of a new, first-of-its-kind law that bans some interstate travel to receive abortion care, new data sheds light on just how crucial out-of-state travel has been and will continue to be in this post-Roe America.
In the wake of Idaho’s passage of a new, first-of-its-kind law that bans some interstate travel to receive abortion care, new data sheds light on just how crucial out-of-state travel has been and will continue to be in this post-Roe America.
The Society of Family Planning, a non-profit that helps support abortion and contraception research, shared the results of its #WeCount national research project with FiveThirtyEight in a piece published Tuesday.
The data collected by #WeCount shows several things we suspected to be true in the weeks and months since the Supreme Court’s Dobbs ruling: that the number of abortions in the U.S. has decreased overall, that the number of telehealth appointments to get abortion pills increased and that the number of abortions in states where the procedures is legal spiked substantially in the six months after the Dobbs ruling, as women and pregnant people were likely forced to travel out of state to access the procedure in the face of increasingly restrictive bans in red states.
Between July and December 2022, more than 66,500 people reported being unable to receive an abortion in their home state. Broken down, nearly 44,000 of those unable to get abortion care in their state of residence couldn’t get access because their home state had banned the procedure, and another 22,680 were blocked by their home states reducing access to abortion, like Arizona, Ohio, Indiana and several others.
FiveThirtyEight’s analysis of the data from #WeCount found that about 35,330 of those who couldn’t get an abortion in their home state ended up traveling to another state to receive care. Additionally:
the data also shows 31,180 people were seemingly unable to get a legal abortion at all. We don’t know whether those people remained pregnant, or got an abortion some other way.
The data is not comprehensive and may shift as only 77 percent of the country’s providers shared data with #WeCount. The findings also don’t take into account the substantial uptick in people ordering abortion pills online, either from international organizations or medical and activist groups in the U.S. that ship abortion medication to people in places where it is illegal.
Additionally, the group found that the uptick in abortions provided in states where abortion is still legal did not make up for declines in other states.
Tags
Who is online
407 visitors
Some of us said at the time that the end of Roe, due to the Supreme Court decision, would lead to ruin for the Republicans. I thought it would happen more from widespread street protests that would effect elections, but we are seeing the elections effect without the massive public protesting.
60,000 lives saved.
An amazing accomplishment.
Or, 60,000 forced births by forcing a woman to undergo an unwanted medical procedure against her will. Depends on how you look at it.
Especially if it's a C-Section. Now there's a slap in the face!
"No, you can't have an abortion, but you will have to have a C-Section because you're not made for birthing babies"
And if anyone wants to challenge that statement I will tell you this. I had to have 2 C-Sections even after trying a vaginal with the first. The first baby couldn't come out so they had to do a C-Section. I was allowed to try pushing for 2 hours with the second but the same thing, he wouldn't come out. So...yeah....I'm not exactly made for birthing babies.
Indeed.
Alternatively, we can accurately say that these 60,000 women are now operating with the exact same reproductive rights men have. How terrible it must be for them.
Are you saying that men also are no longer able to get abortions?
Not really as being pregnant is not a normal thing for men. If men narmaly do not get pregnant then woman should also have the right to not remain in that condition.
that's a good way of looking at it
I'm saying that women in those states have the same reproductive rights men have.
I don't see how. Men don't have a need for abortions. Their reproductive "rights" are basically stick it in anywhere it's allowed and even where it's not allowed.
Well you're right, in a way. Women can choose to walk away from the responsibility of raising and paying for children. Men don't have that option.
Neither do the overwhelming majority of women.
I real life, they have the "right" to be forced to pay child support for children that are not even theirs.
The hell they don't. They just up and abandon their child because they want to. And good luck finding the deadbeat if he doesn't have a job or moved out of town.
If women or a girl is raped they should have the option of an abortion if they want one, so yeah, women need abortion to be legal
Your information appears to be out of date. They have integrated databases now. So a man has about 30 days at his job in Texas before his California child support garnishment kicks in.
Never mind that courts rule in favor of women 85% of the time with regard to child support. In the few cases women are required to pay, on average it's less than half what men are assessed.
Says your faith.....
That's not my belief.
Reality is not a faith.
They would have been killed. They were not.
Perception of reality is most definitely a matter of faith.
So abortions don't kill? Is that your reality?
Lol.
Stepping on an ant while walking down a sidewalk kills. That's reality.
Why do you step on them?
Why would you think I step on them?
So what?
You should just say "I agree with you."
You brought it up.
You're doing a lot of spinning to try and make your comments relevant.
Makes the problems of overpopulation and generational poverty worse
Yes it does. I don't see the anti choicers stepping up to take care of these kids, either
I am against immigration and for abortion rights and do not like being crowded.
Since many of these women could have been making the choice based on their own poverty, it's likely the welfare system in their respective states is going to explode. Creating policies as "baby factories" under the guise of outlawing any kind of abortion care under any reasonable circumstance will leave taxpayers burdened in the end in the states under Republicans who enact these backward policies. No plans and no funding on how to help support women who are poor regardless of color.
I dunno....those states (and I live in one) like to cut that kind of assistance or make work requirements mandatory. Which is hard to do if you have a child under school age and daycare doesn't come cheap